The Role Of The Scientific Community Flashcards
(13 cards)
7 sections of report (reporting psychological investigations)
- Abstract
- Intro
- Method
- Results
- Discussion
- References
- Appendix
Abstract is a ..
Brief overview of the participants and procedures of the study as well as results and conclusions
Intro is an..
Overview of previous research and studies, aims and hypothesis
Method is the..
Detailed description of what the researcher did, enough description so another researcher could replicate
Results are..
Details about what the researcher found, either qualitative/quantative data
Discussion is..
What the researcher concludes from their findings
References are..
Full titles and detail of all the journals and book references in the text
Appendix is..
End of the paper and contains info that is too big/distracting to have in the main body of the paper e.g. full questionnaire
What are peers in peer review?
Experts in the specific field of your research
The peer review process:
Scientists __ something
__ about their results
__ __ receives an __ and sends it for peer review
Peer reviews read the article and __ __ to __
Editor may send __ __ to the __ who may __ and __
If article meets editorial and peer standards it is __
Scientists study something
Write about their results
Journal editor receives an article and sends it for peer review
Peer reviews read the article and provide feedback to editor
Editor may send reviewer recommendations to the scientists who may revise and resubmit
If article meets editorial and peer standards it is published
Allocation of research funding
Paid for by various government and charitable bodies
Strengths of peer review
Published work is validated for accuracy/validity
Peers suggest improvements and allocate further funding
Any problem areas/weaknesses/suggestions for improvement are highlighted as necessary
Upholds the principles of science- prevents scientific fraud
Adds credibility to the research and the field of study
Weaknesses of peer review
Takes time (average 180 days) - delays publication
Peers bring their own bias
Hard to find other experts
Conflicts of interest
Publication bias ( positive findings that find a difference are more likely to be published over negative findings where no difference was shown )